I find that the followingconsiderations...provide a convincingargument for P.
Similarly, don't just say:
Descartes says that Q.
Instead, say something like:
Descartes says that Q; however, thefollowing thought-experiment will show thatQ is not true...
or:
Descartes says that Q. I find this claimplausible, for the following reasons...
There are a variety of things a philosophy paper can aim to accomplish. It usually begins by putting some thesis or argument on the table for consideration. Then itgoes on to do one or two of the following:
o
Criticize that argument; or show that certain arguments for the thesis areno good
o
Defend the argument or thesis against someone else's criticism
o
Offer reasons to believe the thesis
o
Offer counter-examples to the thesis
o
Contrast the strengths and weaknesses of two opposing views about thethesis
o
Give examples which help explain the thesis, or which help to make thethesis more plausible
o
Argue that certain philosophers are committed to the thesis by their other views, though they do not come out and explicitly endorse the thesis
o
Discuss what consequences the thesis would have, if it were true
o
Revise the thesis, in the light of some objection No matter which of these aims you set for yourself,
you have to explicitlypresent reasons for the claims you make
. Students often feel that since it's clear to them that some claim is true, it does not need much argument. But it's very easyto overestimate the strength of your own position. After all, you already accept it.You should assume that your audience does
not
already accept your position; andyou should treat your paper as an attempt to persuade such an audience. Hence,don't start with assumptions which your opponents are sure to reject. If you're tohave any chance of persuading people, you have to start from commonassumptions you all agree to.
Commenting has been disabled.